Saudi Arabia and Kuwait have made significant headway in the rapid development of their countries in many areas.

In recent years, the Saudis have launched a series of reforms including some religious reforms to reigning in religious militants and preachers. And King Abdullah has joined other government leaders like those of Morocco, Turkey and Jordan in promoting inter-religious dialogue internationally, including the opening of a centre for interfaith dialogue in Austria.

Kuwait, in contrast to Saudi Arabia, has been seen as a somewhat more open and liberalizing country politically, socially and religiously, including in contrast to Saudi Arabia permitting the building of churches.

Regrettably, recent religious decisions in both countries are unfortunate reminders about the hurdles and pitfalls in the implementation of religious reform.

Saudi Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdulaziz Al al-Shaikh issued the fatwa on 11 March that further church building should be banned and existing Christian houses of worship should be destroyed in the Arabian Peninsula. The fatwa was in response to a Kuwaiti legislator query if under Islam the government of Kuwait could ban church construction in the country.

The Saudi government has remained silent as has the government-controlled media and indeed many Western media outlets. The Vatican and Catholic and Protestant bishops in Germany, Austria and Russia have sharply criticized the fatwa.

Kuwait, another strong ally of the United States and a member of the UN Human Rights Council is poised to move down a similar slippery religious slope. Kuwait's Parliament approved last week severe new penalties for blasphemy: to impose the death penalty on Muslims who refuse to repent after being found to have insulted God, the Prophet Mohammad, his wives or the Qur'an.

For non-Muslims, the punishment would be up to ten years in prison; for Muslims who repent, the punishment would be up to five years or a fine. The Emir of Kuwait has thirty days to approve these penalties before they would become law.

Among its first critics was Leonard Leo, Chair of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, who called for their rejection:

"These penalties are alarming and contrary to international human rights standards ... because they jeopardize the lives of individuals that exercise their internationally-guaranteed freedoms of religion and expression."

Many will see these worrisome developments against a background of conflicts and killings from Africa to Southeast Asia. Interreligious and inter-communal tensions have flared up not only in Egypt and Malaysia but also in Sudan, Nigeria, Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia and Pakistan.

A significant minority of hard-line ultraconservative and militant Muslims - like their counterparts in Christianity and Judaism - are not pluralistic, but rather strongly exclusivist in their attitudes toward other faiths and even fellow believers with whom they disagree. These myopic religious world views can turn ugly and violent.

The Saudi fatwa is a case in point. Perhaps the strongest denunciations of the Saudi fatwa by Turkey's top religious leader went unnoticed despite the fact that he blasted the Grand Mufti's fatwa as in contradiction to the teachings of Islam.

"The opinion of the grand mufti also obviously contradicts the agreements that the Prophet of Islam signed with the non-Muslim communities both in Medina and in the region. It also plainly overlooks the right of immunity given by Islam to the holy shrines and temples of other religions on the basis of the rule of law throughout its history."

Gormez underscored the negative impact of the fatwa:

"We strongly believe that this declaration has left dark shadows upon the concept of rights and freedoms in Islam that have always been observed on the basis of its sources, and it will not be recorded as an opinion of Islam."

He added:

"We, therefore, entirely reject the aforementioned opinion and hope that it will be amended as soon as possible."

The plight of Christians and other minorities in some Muslim countries in the face of a significant and dangerous minority of religious extremists and the failures of political and religious leaders threatens both the safety and security of religious minorities and the very fabric of Muslim societies.

Mainstream Muslim religious and political leaders and the media need not only to condemn religious extremism and terrorism, as many have done nationally and internationally, but also to speak out against those religious leaders and others who continue to advocate religious exclusivist theologies or doctrines and their implementation in law and society.

Actions

Share

Comments (8)

Jon Piasente :

23 May 2012 7:58:53pm

Ibrahim: Muslims are, by definition, adherents of Islam. Islam is above all, belief in the unity of God. There are further articles of faith and the five pillars, which more comprehensively define Islam.

The hadith you quoted is neither an article of faith nor a pillar of Islam. It is an obscure reference that is unknown to most Muslims. It is also an oft cited quote among anti-Islam websites, which base their rhetoric on such references, rather than the material and knowledge which most Muslims are familiar with.

In addition to the hadith being far from a defining aspect of Islam, it has been taken out of context and misunderstood. A commentary explaining it can be found here: http://islamnewsroom.com/news-we-need/657

Regarding John Esposito’s use of the terms 'extremism' and 'exclusivism', you might benefit from reading his book, linked at the bottom of the article, 'Who Speaks for Islam?' where you will find that these characterisations are far from ill-founded: they reflect the opinion of the vast majority of Muslims themselves.

Cupcake: these laws are indeed extreme and unusual interpretations. That is precisely why Mehmet Gormez sharply criticised them. They are not logical and systematic extrapolations of the Qur'an and hadith, because they completely ignore the very many ayat and hadith which promote tolerance and respect for religious minorities. Ignorance of these are not 'solid philosophical roots', and they are only 'theologically straightforward' insofar as they ignore evidence.

Even a rudimentary understanding of the Qur'an and the life of Muhammad will result in these extreme and exclusivist interpretations being rejected out of hand. As a devout Muslim, I condemn them as being intellectually dishonest, intentionally divisive, and patently false.

M Crichton :

20 Jun 2014 9:43:48pm

According to the World Health Report, in Saudi Arabia, 1.5 million migrant workers are excluded from Labor Laws and are forced to work 15 to 20 hours a day, and “frequently endure forced confinement, food deprivation and severe psychological, physical and sexual abuse.”

Cupcake :

16 May 2012 8:12:22pm

These laws are not extreme and unusual interpretations of Islam, but are logical and systematic extrapolations of the Koran and hadith; if they weren't they wouldn't be law in these countries. They have solid philosophical roots and intellectual traditions behind them. We in the west might not like it, but our emotional and reactive regard for them is probably irrelevant to their validity as interpretted by many scholars and lawmakers.

They might be sociologically extreme, especially by liberal western standards, but they're theologically straightforward. I wish intellectuals like Mr Esposito would be more honest about this. That would be really constructive as interfaith/interspiritual dialogue, but 'mainstream' Muslims (as he calls them) seem reluctant to discuss this.

On the Wider Web

There is something degenerate about the politics of Greek debt. It is as though nothing has been learned in 2,000 years - as if the left had forgotten the powers of capital and imperialism and the right cannot make a distinction between the financial economy and productivity.

From the beginning, polling was in the business to make headlines, and that is pretty much what it continues to do today. The seeming accuracy of results to the tenth of a percentage point doesn't stand up to basic methodological scrutiny, nor does the content of the questions themselves. If the devil is in the details, the details about religion polls are devilishly difficult to trust.

Best of abc.net.au

Ring names

What do the varied and eccentric nicknames of boxers say about the men who claim them?

Subscribe

How Does this Site Work?

This site is where you will find ABC stories, interviews and videos on the subject of Religion & Ethics. As you browse through the site, the links you follow will take you to stories as they appeared in their original context, whether from ABC News, a TV program or a radio interview. Please enjoy.